As one might expect of a man so brilliant, Thomas Jefferson had the perfect
answer to modern politicians itchy to disarm the ordinary citizen.
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms ... disarm only those who are neither
inclined nor determined to commit crimes. ... Such laws make things worse
for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage
than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater
confidence than an armed man."
This is an entry in his Commonplace Book, dated sometime between 1774 and
1776.
Can anyone argue against his logic? Criminals are by definition lawbreakers
and don't obey gun-control laws. It will be no consolation to you that police
may later charge the man who murdered you with the additional crime of
possession of a firearm by a felon. That won't buy you a ticket out of the
cemetery. You're history.
Even in our modern society, 99 percent of the time police don't get to the
scene until after the crime has been committed. Between the time you first
perceive yourself as the pending victim of a crime until the police arrive (if
they do at all), you are on your own. Self-defense is no longer a theory.
Running away is rarely an option. Your choice is to fight or suffer what the
criminal has decided to do to you.
Having a gun won't guarantee you'll win a gunfight, but it will certainly
guarantee that you will have a chance of winning. If the criminal is armed and
you aren't, you have no chance at all. Some younger men who keep in shape
might imagine they can handle their assailant, so I will simply pass on to them
the advice of a tae kwon do master who was a member of the South Korean
intelligence agency. "If your life is in danger, use a gun," he said.
Any honest martial artist will tell you about the principle of distance. You
can't hit a man beyond the distance of your outstretched arm. You can't kick
a man beyond the length of your leg. But a man with a gun can stand 15 yards
away and shoot you. And unlike Jackie Chan or Chuck Norris, you don't have a
scriptwriter who will determine how the fight will end.
I'm not suggesting everyone go out and buy a gun. Owning a firearm for
self-defense is a serious business. A gun is an inanimate object. If it's
loaded,
cocked and the trigger is pulled, the gun will kill or maim anybody who
happens to be in front of the barrel when the firing pin strikes the cap. You
want
to be dead certain the person who gets the bullet deserves it, because
killing is an act of finality. You can't undo it. You'd better be sure you can
live with it. And for God's sake, don't leave a loaded gun where children
yours or a neighbor's can get to it.
Because you can't rely on the modern justice system to produce justice, I
will also pass along some advice an old country lawman gave me when I was a
young reserve deputy.
"Son, if you ever have to use that thing," he said, "make sure the judge can
hear only one version of what happened." In plainer language, if you have to
shoot somebody, kill him. Otherwise, in these crazy times, the perp may sue
you even though he is a career criminal who initiated the assault. Or some
prosecutor who doesn't believe people should defend themselves might try to
indict you.
The human race hasn't changed over the millennia. There are still good
people and bad people, kind people and cruel people. There are still predators
who
will prey on people they think are too weak to defend themselves. There is a
lot more to self-defense than I have space to talk about, so I will close
with a story from the 1800s.
A man on his way to Texas asked an Arkansas store owner if he thought he
would need a gun. "Well," the store owner said, "maybe you will and maybe you
won't, but if you do, you'll need it in a hurry."